[Rezwan]

Thank you guys, you’re awesome! I feel we’re close to a solution on the math.

Also, I put a link to the new wiki on the masthead of the website, so it’s there on every page. Now to add a link to the forum template.

[Rezwan]

I’m seeing a lot of words here. I asked for pictures. Yes, it’s speculative, but Mackay already knows that, and you add a disclaimer. It’s comparing speculative things with speculative things, so it’s OK.

[Rezwan]

BTW Dennis, Mike, which senators and congressman are you targeting? Fusion Day is coming up and this would be a great time to contact some and try to meet with them. But we need to act soon. Just a few names.

[Rezwan]

Hey Ivy Matt! Thanks for the response! Yes, pay your dues already. You’ll get/be part of a warm (10Bn degree) fuzzy feeling. How much more incentive do you need? 🙂

Ivy Matt wrote: I don’t know about themes. I’d imagine the themes ought to be determined by the issues or successes that crop up during the month’s research.

Yes! And this speaks to the issue we’ve been grappling with for some time – that FFS and LPP are seen as the same entity, and that FFS is exclusively about LPP research. (This affirms the need to spin off the Fusion energy League as a separate organization. It really does detract from the FFS core focus).

OK, let’s work with that. You are actually referring to the LPP reports in your comment – but they call them Focus Fusion reports so the conflation is understandable. The takeaway here is, why fight it, coordinate better with LPP. And keep in mind, we have to do this, but in a way that makes it clear we’re not the marketing division of LPP (unless we really are, in which case we should just accept it and merge).

We could indeed go into more depth about the research results and keeping track of the context as you suggest here:

One thing I would like to see is some continuity between updates. As it is, it seems that various figures (e.g. pinch voltage, neutron counts, energy output in joules, ion temperatures, electron temperatures) are mentioned in one month’s update and then ignored for the next few months.

Could the theme be continuity and tracking? One month is all about “the Pinch” and one about “neutron counts” and so forth, until we build up a framework that people can better understand the experiment with?

I realize that part of the reason for that is likely due to the delays caused by various mechanical issues, and maybe it doesn’t make sense to give new figures when they haven’t changed lately. Still, I’ve found it helpful to keep my own list of figures (based on largely on the milestones) and update it according to the information given in the monthly updates.

Great! This is even better than cash contributions! You’re keeping track, and you probably have a wish list of things you’d like to see. Can you start an article stub on the wiki and develop this, and then when you guys think it’s good, we’ll include it in the newsletter to the masses? That would be AWESOME!

I’ve signed up for most of the mailing list categories, just to see what it’s like. If the volume is too great (something I don’t anticipate for now) I will probably unsubscribe from some of them.

Yep. For now there will be no volume : ) Those are placeholders for an imagined future when the Fusion Energy League has a staff of writers or a great platform with regular contributors. For now, the lists help us see what areas people are interested in and who is interested in what more specifically.

Indeed, the purpose there is for outreach to the broader public, for coalition building. The time will come when we try to build coalitions with other groups – for example, when we go to woo the space enthusiasts. We’d send folks from those communities a fusion/space themed newsletter. Also, we’d like to find out who the people are already in our community who are also connected to those communities, so that we can work with them on tailoring pro fusion messages to their other group.

Also, according to the January update most readers thought last year’s year-end report was too detailed? o_O Who are these people?

This was the LPP update. They said it, not us. I don’t know who these “most readers” are. Perhaps LPP investors.

[Rezwan]

Thanks! This is great information!

It would be great if you could post this in the website and not just in the forums. Shoot me an email if you are interested and I will add you as an author and go through the process with you.

That goes for the rest of you. A lot of great info is hidden in these forums. We need folks to take that extra step to polish thoughts into articles for the web site. Contact me if you want to write. Also, editors and polishers are welcome for formatting oversight.

Thanks!

[Rezwan]

Ivy Matt wrote: This week WSEC 2012 is being held in Geneva, Switzerland. The objective:

Cold fusion researcher Francesco Celani is doing a presentation on LENR at the conference, and also chairing the “Novel Energy Technologies” working group. I don’t know if anyone will be presenting anything related to more conventional high-energy plasma fusion at the conference, but what I have read about the conference doesn’t give me much hope.

I was just getting around to doing a post on this issue, only to find that the wsec.ch site is no longer up and running. It looks like a parking page. Wonder what happened. In the meantime, the LENR angle at the conference is getting some press and people are sharing it with me.

The message I get is that the hot fusion field needs to be more proactive.

[Rezwan]

Francisl wrote: Would it be helpful to refer to the math or science courses at the Khan Academy for persons interested in re-learning this information?

Yes, they have a great section on physics. http://www.khanacademy.org/#physics

The best thing to do is:

1) look over their physics section and see what the gaps are to fill to get people to understand plasma physics.
2) Break it down, step by step, what are all the elements people need to know and in what order?
3) Then take each topic and make a 5-10 minute video about it.
4) Post these on the web with a master page showing the links in order.
5) Add some sample problems to help people think it through.

Most important: Then invite Sal to review the videos and post as is or remake them for the Khan Academy – which has a huge audience.

We can use the new wiki to bash out the specifics.

And…ACTION!

[Rezwan]

wolfram wrote: …a reliable open source way of evaluating merit in scientific articles would be a coup in metrology.

There are likely some open source efforts along these lines. Now to get a list.

Also, the incentive seems to be to churn out stuff, volume thus mattering more than quality, and people spending most their effort churning out stuff rather than working to create an elegant, clear knowledge system. Too many dots, not enough connecting or contextualizing the dots.

[Rezwan]

wolfram wrote: the human body operates at 100 watts, in the pretty heavily industrialized countries there’s about a 1000 watts per person, an order of magnitude more. a megawatt is another 3 orders of magnitude, it’s like the average person has 10000 people’s worth of mechanical slaves. I wonder if anybodies done that analysis, position in a hierarchy or something based on available wattage.

What are some ways to show this graphically?

Think of Information Is Beautiful site.

[Rezwan]

998 Million pound profit. From convening conversations.

[Rezwan]

The event is organized by Reed Exhibitions, professional event organizers. This event is run for a profit with a specific business model. If we were interested in being in such an event, we could contact the organizers and inform them of this additional “niche market”, and put them to work inviting speakers and so forth. I.e., they would do outreach to attract fusion people and speakers, with the idea that said people would pay fees and so forth. They [fusion people, it is theorized] would attend in the hopes of beneficial networking connections. The fusion community in general hasn’t been very big on such types of activity.

Reed Exhibitions is the world’s leading events organiser, with over 470 events in 37 countries. In 2008 Reed brought together over seven million industry professionals from around the world generating billions of dollars in business. Today Reed events are held throughout the Americas, Europe, the Middle East and Asia Pacific, and organised by 38 fully staffed offices.

Reed organises a wide range of events, including exhibitions, conferences, congresses and meetings. Its portfolio of over 470 events serves 44 industry sectors, including: Aerospace & aviation, automobiles, broadcasting, building & construction, electronics, energy, oil & gas, engineering, manufacturing, environment, food service & hospitality, gifts, healthcare, interior design, IT & telecoms, jewellery, life science & pharmaceuticals, machinery, medical education, printing & graphics, property & real estate, security & safety, sports & recreation, travel.

Working closely with professional bodies, trade associations and government departments Reed ensures that each and every event is targeted and relevant to industry needs. As a result, many Reed events are market leaders in their field.

Reed Exhibitions is part of Reed Elsevier Group plc, a FTSE-100 company and world-leading publisher and information provider. In 2007, Reed Elsevier made an adjusted profit before taxation of £998 million on turnover of £4,584 million.

[Rezwan]

wolfram wrote: It will provide a giant flag for where to investigate next though. Which will be nice, since I’ll be in need of a thesis subject by about that time.

We shall add these to the mission statement: “Provide flags of investigation and material for theses” : )

[Rezwan]

Great! Is this referring to the bill in the House noted in this post? https://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/1015/ Bill number and trackers would be helpful.

[Rezwan]

Congratulations!

More than a hail Mary pass, it’s a duty to cover the bases in fusion – to show leadership in fusion. Emphasis on leadership might have an impact on leaders.

[Rezwan]

Ivy Matt wrote: I suppose you could compare it to the difference between breaking the sound barrier and producing an economical supersonic airliner.

Great analogy!

[Author]

Posts